Experts Matter. Find Yours.
Connect for media, speaking, professional opportunities & more.
Poll finds bipartisan agreement on a key issue: Regulating AI
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article here. In the run-up to the vote in the U.S. Senate on President Donald Trump’s spending and tax bill, Republicans scrambled to revise the bill to win support of wavering GOP senators. A provision included in the original bill was a 10-year moratorium on any state law that sought to regulate artificial intelligence. The provision denied access to US$500 million in federal funding for broadband internet and AI infrastructure projects for any state that passed any such law. The inclusion of the AI regulation moratorium was widely viewed as a win for AI firms that had expressed fears that states passing regulations on AI would hamper the development of the technology. However, many federal and state officials from both parties, including state attorneys general, state legislators and 17 Republican governors, publicly opposed the measure. In the last hours before the passage of the bill, the Senate struck down the provision by a resounding 99-1 vote. In an era defined by partisan divides on issues such as immigration, health care, social welfare, gender equality, race relations and gun control, why are so many Republican and Democratic political leaders on the same page on the issue of AI regulation? Whatever motivated lawmakers to permit AI regulation, our recent poll shows that they are aligned with the majority of Americans who view AI with trepidation, skepticism and fear, and who want the emerging technology regulated. Bipartisan sentiments We are political scientists who use polls to study partisan polarization in the United States, as well as the areas of agreement that bridge the divide that has come to define U.S. politics. In April 2025, we fielded a nationally representative poll that sought to capture what Americans think about AI, including what they think AI will mean for the economy and society going forward. The public is generally pessimistic. We found that 65% of Americans said they believe AI will increase the spread of false information. Fifty-six percent of Americans worry AI will threaten the future of humanity. Fewer than 3 in 10 Americans told us AI will make them more productive (29%), make people less lonely (21%) or improve the economy (22%). While Americans tend to be deeply divided along partisan lines on most issues, the apprehension regarding AI’s impact on the future appears to be relatively consistent across Republicans and Democrats. For example, only 19% of Republicans and 22% of Democrats said they believe that artificial intelligence will make people less lonely. Respondents across the parties are in lockstep when it comes to their views on whether AI will make them personally more productive, with only 29% − both Republicans and Democrats − agreeing. And 60% of Democrats and 53% Republicans said they believe AI will threaten the future of humanity. On the question of whether artificial intelligence should be strictly regulated by the government, we found that close to 6 in 10 Americans (58%) agree with this sentiment. Given the partisan differences in support for governmental regulation of business, we expected to find evidence of a partisan divide on this question. However, our data finds that Democrats and Republicans are of one mind on AI regulation, with majorities of both Democrats (66%) and Republicans (54%) supporting strict AI regulation. When we take into account demographic and political characteristics such as race, educational attainment, gender identity, income, ideology and age, we again find that partisan identity has no significant impact on opinion regarding the regulation of AI. State of anxiety In the years ahead, the debate over AI and the government’s role in regulating it is likely to intensify, on both the state and federal levels. As each day seems to bring new advances in AI’s capability and reach, the future is shaping up to be one in which human beings coexist – and hopefully flourish – alongside AI. This new reality has made the American public, both Democrats and Republicans, justifiably nervous, and our polling captures this widespread trepidation. Lawmakers and technology leaders alike could address this anxiety by better communicating the pitfalls and potential of AI, and take seriously the concerns of the public. After all, the public is not alone in its trepidation. Many experts in the field also have substantial worries about the future of AI. One of the fundamental political questions moving forward, then, will be to what degree regulators put guardrails on this emerging and transformative technology in order to protect Americans from AI’s negative consequences. Adam Eichen is a doctoral candidate in political science at UMass Amherst. Alexander Theodoridis is associate professor of political science and co-director of the UMass Amherst Poll at UMass Amherst. Sara M. Kirshbaum is a postdoctoral fellow and lecturer of political science at UMass Amherst. Tatishe Nteta is provost professor of political science and director of the UMass Amherst Poll at UMass Amherst.
Power Shift: How CMU Is Leading America’s Energy Evolution
Carnegie Mellon University, long known for its prowess in computer science and engineering, is now emerging as a key innovator within America’s energy landscape. As AI models grow more powerful, so too does their appetite for energy, straining an aging and outdated grid and prompting urgent questions about infrastructure, security and access. From reimagining AI data centers to modernizing and securing the electric grid, CMU researchers are working on practical solutions to pressing challenges in how the U.S. produces, moves and secures energy. Learn what CMU experts have to say about their Work That Matters.
CMU Experts at the Intersection of Energy and Innovation
Carnegie Mellon University experts are developing practical solutions for a fast-changing energy system. Their work modernizes infrastructure, accelerates innovation and harnesses AI for a more efficient and resilient future at a moment when the stakes for national competitiveness and public well-being have never been higher. Learn what CMU experts have to say about their Work That Matters.
Artificial Intelligence Makes Energy Demand More Complex — And More Achievable
In a 2024 paper, researchers from Carnegie Mellon University and machine learning development corporation Hugging Face found that generative AI systems could use as much as 33 times more energy to complete a task than task-specific software would. “The climate and sustainability challenge can be overwhelming in the amount of new clean technology that we have to deploy and develop, and the ways that the energy system has to evolve,” said Costa Samaras, head of the university-wide Wilton E. Scott Institute for Energy Innovation. “The scale of the challenge alone can be overwhelming to folks.” However, Carnegie Mellon University’s standing commitment to the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals and its position as a nationally recognized leader in technologies like artificial intelligence mean that it is uniquely positioned to address growing concerns around energy demand, climate resilience and social good.
The Canadian Housing Market is a Mess
The Social Contract is Broken—And We Forgot to Tell Our Kids There was a time in Canada when the rules seemed straightforward: work hard, stick to the plan, and your kids would have an even better future than you did. That was the unspoken social contract—not legally binding, but deeply believed. A handshake between generations, sealed with maple syrup and mutual optimism. You purchased a modest home, stayed with one employer for 30 years, and retired with a gold watch, a pension, and a house you owned outright. Life wasn’t flashy, but it was fair. And your kids? They would climb even higher. Well… about that! The Housing Market: From Stepping Stone to Stumbling Block Homeownership used to be a rite of passage. Now it feels more like winning The Amazing Race: Toronto Edition. According to Statistics Canada housing data, in 1990, the average Canadian home sold for approximately $215,000. Fast-forward to late 2023–early 2024, and that number has ballooned to around $670,000–$700,000 on average —a more than 200–225% increase in just over three decades. Meanwhile, wages didn’t get the memo. Since 1990, they’ve only doubled. So, while home prices soared, incomes shifted to the kitchen for more instant noodles. It's not just a gap—it’s a canyon. Sure, there was a housing correction in the early ’90s. But if you’re under 40, you’ve never seen a price drop—only stable prices (on a good day). Meanwhile, boomers and older Gen Xers bought homes when down payments didn’t require a GoFundMe page. Boomers Rode the Rocket—Then Pulled Up the Ladder Let’s be honest: we did quite well. If you purchased property in the ’70s, ’80s, or ’90s, you benefited from a wave of equity that transformed retirement into a cruise ship brochure. For many, the house became the largest—and only—source of real wealth. We got used to it. Then we got protective. Then... well, a bit smug. • NIMBYism? Guilty. • Zoning restrictions? Voted yes. • Capital gains reform? Over my arthritic body. • Preferred Pronouns – Me, Myself and I We feared anything that could lower our property values. A 25% correction? Not in my golden years! But that might be what it takes to give our kids a fair shot. We told them to "work hard," then quietly reinforced a game they couldn’t win. We Told Them to Hustle—Then Rigged the Game Today’s young Canadians aren’t lazy; they’re exhausted. They’ve done everything we asked—degrees, careers, even side hustles—and still can’t afford a 500-square-foot shoebox in Toronto without cashing in their RRSPs or moving back into our basements. By the way, they’re doing this—not because they missed us, but because rent is eating up half their paycheque and still asking for dessert. Even worse? Many are looking abroad, not for a gap year, but for an economy in which they can participate—one where they might be able to afford a home and groceries in the same month. If the best and brightest are quietly packing their bags, it’s not wanderlust; it’s a policy failure. There’s now a whole ecosystem catalyzed by everything from consultants to cloud-based software and payment platforms that has aided a global movement of “creative-class” digital nomads. For those who want a more affordable cost of living and have the skills necessary to work remotely, this generation has options to move. In "Intelligent Money," author Chris Skinner envisions a future where AI-powered financial systems won’t just advise against homeownership—they’ll actively discourage it. Why commit to mortgage debt when you can rent flexibly, invest digitally, and maintain liquidity in your life? Not a dream, but a necessity. We told them to pull up their socks. They’re wondering if we sold their shoes. What Happened to Profit Sharing? Remember when companies used to share their success? Microsoft, Google, and yes, still Costco, offered profit-sharing or stock options that turned employees into unexpected millionaires. It wasn’t charity; it was a fair deal. Then gig work emerged, HR departments disappeared, and the only thing we shared was burnout. We need to restore fairness—perhaps even incentivize companies that value loyalty. Renter Equity Accounts: A Radical Concept—Equity You're not building wealth if rent is more than 30% of your income. You’re funding someone else’s retirement. So, here’s a thought: when rent exceeds 30%, why don’t we match the excess—25% to 50%—and deposit it into a locked “Renter Equity Account”? It grows tax-free and can be used for: • A down payment • Retirement savings • Student debt relief • Emergency funds Employers could contribute to REA plans. Governments could provide incentives, and renters could finally receive more than just a rent receipt and a pat on the back. It's Time for Bold, Practical Ideas We can’t rewind to 1990. (Although the fashion world is trying.) But we can fix what’s broken: Let Canadians earn their first $250,000 tax-free, provided it is used for a down payment or to eliminate student loans. That’s helping reduce overall debt. Ensure zoning reform is effective by linking federal infrastructure funding to genuine housing development. Establish public wealth tools - TFSA-style accounts for low-wealth, high-effort Canadians. Forgive student loans for public service, specifically for individuals filling positions such as nurses, teachers, early childhood educators, and tradespeople, with added incentives for those relocating to underserved areas. Invest in them, and they will reinvest in us. What Families Can Do—Right Now No, you can’t rewrite national policy from the kitchen table. (Unless you’re Chrystia Freeland.) But here’s what you can do: Start a down payment fund—consider using a TFSA or an investment account to help your kids build capital. Create an ADU—laneway homes, granny suites, legal basement rentals. Housing and support combined. Access your home equity—HELOCs or reverse mortgages can be lifelines, not luxury options. Create a rent-to-own family plan—turn monthly rent into future equity. Discuss finances—share your successes, warn against mistakes, and share the financial knowledge you’ve gained from hard lessons. An Apology—from the Heart To our kids and to the next generation, we should say we’re sorry. We didn’t plan for this outcome. We assumed the paths we walked would still be open for you, that the same rules would still apply, and that equity would be available to all. We forgot that a contract—even an unspoken one—still needs to be honoured. But it’s not too late. We can speak out. We can share our thoughts. We can change the policies, shift the mindsets, and reopen the doors that have been closed, because the future of this country shouldn’t be something you have to leave to find. Let’s fix this. So, you can stay. And thrive. And lead. Let’s rebuild the contract together. Deal? Don’t Retire … Re-Wire! Sue
The Impact of Counterfeit Goods in Global Commerce
Introduction Counterfeiting has been described as “the world’s second oldest profession.” In 2018, worldwide counterfeiting was estimated to cost the global economy between USD 1.7 trillion and USD 4.5 trillion annually, as well as resulting in more than 70 deaths and 350,000 serious injuries annually. It is estimated that more than a quarter of US consumers have purchased a counterfeit product. The counterfeiting problem is expected to be exacerbated by the unprecedented shift in tariff policy. Tariffs, designed as an import tax or duty on an imported product, are often a percentage of the price and can have different values for different products. Tariffs drive up the cost of imported brand name products but may not, or only to a lesser extent, impact the cost of counterfeit goods. In this article, we examine the extent of the global counterfeit dilemma, the role experts play in tracking and mitigating the problem, the use of anti-counterfeiting measures, and the potential impact that tariffs may have on the flow of counterfeit goods. Brand goods have always been a target of counterfeits due to their high price and associated prestige. These are often luxury goods and clothing, but can also be pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, and electronics. The brand name is an indication of quality materials, workmanship, and technology. People will pay more for the “real thing,” or decide to buy something cheaper that looks “just as good.” In many cases, “just as good” is a counterfeit of the brand name product. A tariff is an import tax or duty that is typically paid by the importer and can drive up the cost of imported brand name products. For example, a Yale study has shown that shoe prices may increase by 87% and apparel prices by 65%, due to tariffs. On the other hand, counterfeit products don’t play by the rules and can often avoid paying tariffs, such as the case of many smaller, online transactions, shipped individually. Therefore, we expect to see an increase in counterfeit products as well as a need to increase efforts to reduce the economic losses of counterfeiting. The Scale of the Counterfeit Problem In their 2025 report, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), estimated that in 2021, “global trade in counterfeit goods was valued at approximately USD 467 billion, or 2.3% of total global imports. This absolute value represents an increase from 2019, when counterfeit trade was estimated at USD 464 billion, although its relative share decreased compared to 2019 when it accounted for 2.5% of world trade. For imports into the European Union, the value of counterfeit goods was estimated at USD 117 billion, or 4.7% of total EU imports.” In a 2020 report, the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) estimated the size of the international counterfeit market as having a “range from a low of USD 200 billion in 2008 to a high of USD 509 billion in 2019.” According to the OEDC / EUIPO General Trade-Related Index of Counterfeiting for economies (GTRIC-e), China continues to be the primary source of counterfeit goods, as well as Bangladesh, Lebanon, Syrian Arab Republic, and Türkiye. Based on customs seizures in 2020-21, the most common items are clothing (21.6%), footwear (21.4%), and handbags, followed by electronics and watches. Based on the value of goods seized, watches (23%) and footwear (15%) had the highest value. However, it should be noted that items that are easier to detect and seize are likely to be overrepresented in the data. Although the share of watches declined, and electronics, toys, and games increased, it remains unclear whether this represents a long term trend or just a short term fluctuation. In general, high value products in high demand continue to be counterfeited. Data from the US Library of Congress indicates that 60% – 80% of counterfeit products are purchased by Americans. The US accounts for approximately 5% of the world’s consumers; however, it represents greater than 20% of the world’s purchasing power. Though it is still possible to find counterfeit products at local markets, a large number of counterfeit goods are obtained through online retailers and shipped directly to consumers as small parcels classified as de minimis trade. This allows for the duty-free import of products up to USD 800 in value. Counterfeit items may be knowingly or unknowingly purchased from online retailers and shipped directly to consumers, duty-free. Purchased products can be shipped via postal services, classified as de minimis trade. Approximately 79% of packages seized contained less than 10 items. Given the size and volume of the packages arriving daily, many or most will evade scrutiny by customs officials. This means of import is increasing over time. In 2017-19 it was 61% of seizures. By 2020-21, it was 79%. Economic Impact of Counterfeiting The scale of the counterfeiting problem has significant impacts on the US economy, US business interests, and US innovations in lost sales and lost jobs. Moreover, counterfeit products are often made quickly and cheaply, using materials that may be toxic. The companies producing these goods may not dispose of waste properly and may dump it into waterways, causing significant environmental consequences. Counterfeit products from electrical equipment and life jackets to batteries and smoke alarms may be made without adhering to safety standards or be properly tested. These products may fail to function when you need it and may lead to fire, electric shock, poisoning, and other accidents that can seriously injure and even kill consumers. Counterfeit cosmetics and pharmaceuticals can also lead to injuries by either including unsafe ingredients or by failing to provide the benefits of the real product. The Tariff Counterfeit Connection Tariffs may be seen as a tax on consumers and raise the price of imported products that are already the target of counterfeiters such as luxury leather products and apparel. It’s commonly understood that raising prices on genuine products can only drive up the demand for counterfeit goods. In general, consumers will have less disposable income and the brand goods they desire will cost more which is bound to increase the demand for counterfeit goods. Although recent changes removing the USD 800 tax exemption on de minimis shipments from China and Hong Kong will make it more expensive for counterfeiters to ship their goods internationally, tariffs are typically applied as a percentage of the cost of an object. This will cause the price of more expensive legitimate goods to increase even more than the cheaper counterfeit goods and likely make the counterfeit products even more attractive economically. Therefore, we expect to see an increase in counterfeit products as well as an increase in efforts to reduce the economic losses of counterfeiting. The Role of Technical Experts in Counterfeit Detection Technical experts play an important role in both the prevention and detection of counterfeits and helping to identify counterfeiting entities. Whether counterfeit money, clothing, shoes, electronics, cosmetics or pharmaceuticals, the first step in fighting counterfeits is detecting them. In some cases, the counterfeit product is obvious. A leather product may not be leather, a logo may be wrong, packaging may have a spelling mistake, or a holographic label may be missing. These products may be seized by customs. However, some counterfeit products are very difficult to detect. In the case of a counterfeit memory card with less than the stated capacity or a pharmaceutical that contains the wrong active ingredient, technical analysis may be needed to identify the parts. Technical analysis may also be used to try and identify the source of the counterfeit goods. For prevention measures, manufacturers may use radio frequency identification (RFID) or Near Field Communication (NFC) tags within their products. RFID tags are microscopic semiconductor chips attached to a metallic printed antenna. The tag itself may be flexible and easy to incorporate into packaging or into the product itself. A passive RFID requires no power and has sufficient storage to store information such as product name, stock keeping unit (SKU), place of manufacture, date of manufacture, as well as some sort of cryptographic information to attest to the authenticity of the tag. A simple scanner powers the tag using an electromagnetic field and reads the tag. If manufacturers include RFID tags in products, an X-ray to identify a product in a de minimis shipment (perhaps using artificial intelligence technology) and an RFID scanner to verify the authenticity of the product can be used to efficiently screen a large number of packages. Many products also may be marked with photo-luminescent dyes with unique properties that may be read by special scanners and allow authorities to detect legitimate products. Similarly, doped hybrid oxide particles with distinctive photo-responsive features may be printed on products. These particles, when exposed to laser light, experience a fast increase in temperature which may be quickly detected. For either of these examples, the ability to identify legitimate products, or – due to the absence of marking – track counterfeit products, allows authorities to map the flow of the counterfeit goods through the supply chain as they are manufactured, shipped, and are exported and imported to countries. For many years, electronic memory cards such as SD cards and USB sticks have been counterfeited. In many cases, the fake card will have a capacity much smaller than listed. For example, a 32GB memory card for a camera may only hold 1GB. Sometimes, these products may be identified by analyzing the packaging for discrepancies from the brand name products. In other cases, software must be used to verify the capacity and performance of each one, which is time-consuming when analyzing a large number of products. Forensic investigators, comprised of forensic accountants and forensic technologists, are heavily involved in efforts to combat this illicit trade. By analyzing financial records, supply-chain data, and transaction histories, they trace the origins and pathways of counterfeit products. Their work often involves identifying suspicious procurement patterns, shell companies, and irregular inventory flows that signal counterfeit activity. Forensic investigators often begin by mapping the counterfeit supply chain, an intricate web that often spans continents. Using data analytics, transaction tracing, and inventory audits, they identify anomalies in procurement, distribution, and sales records. These methodologies help pinpoint the origin of counterfeit goods, the intermediaries involved, and the final points of sale. By reconstructing the flow of goods and money, forensic investigators can begin to unmask activities. Cross-border partnerships are essential for tracking assets, sharing insights, and coordinating with financial regulators. Public-private partnerships further enhance the effectiveness of anti-counterfeiting efforts. Forensic investigators often serve as bridges between government agencies, brand owners, and financial institutions, facilitating the exchange of key information. These partnerships increase information-sharing, streamline investigations, and amplify the impact of enforcement actions. A promising development in this space is the World Customs Organization’s Smart Customs Project, which integrates artificial intelligence to detect and intercept counterfeit goods. Forensic investigators can leverage this initiative by analyzing AI-generated alerts and incorporating them into broader financial investigations, which allows for faster and more accurate identification of illicit networks. Jurisdictional complexity is a major hurdle in anti-counterfeiting efforts. Forensic investigators work closely with legal teams to navigate these challenges to ensure that investigations comply with local laws, and evidence is admissible and can withstand scrutiny in court, especially when dealing with offshore accounts and international money laundering schemes. Forensic investigators follow the money, tracing illicit profits through bank accounts, shell companies, and cryptocurrency transactions. Their findings not only help recover stolen assets but also support disputes by providing expert testimony that quantifies financial losses and identifies the bad actors. Conclusion Imitations of brand name products have become more convincing, harder to detect, and the sources of the counterfeit goods more difficult to identify. While counterfeiting clearly has evolved because of technological advancements, e-commerce, and the growing sophistication of bad actors, the process has now been complicated even further by the unpredictable tariff and trade policies that are affecting businesses worldwide. Consequently, companies need to take a multi-faceted approach to these new challenges introduced into the counterfeiting of products by tariffs. By engaging high-tech product authentication measures, utilizing technology-based alerts about counterfeits, and retaining the specialized skills of forensic investigators and other experts, companies will be able to navigate the risks posed by the complex and changing relationship between tariffs and counterfeit goods. To learn more about this topic and how it can impact your business or connect with James E. Malackowski simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview today. To connect with David Fraser or Matthew Brown - contact : Kristi L. Stathis, J.S. Held +1 786 833 4864 Kristi.Stathis@JSHeld.com
Every day, pedestrians and cyclists in Canada experience high-risk near-misses that could have resulted in serious injury or fatalities. A new seven-month study, commissioned by CAA, has uncovered over 600,000 near-miss incidents across 20 intersections nationwide, creating the largest dataset of its kind in Canada. While actual collisions are recorded by police, near misses are not. “The findings are clear, near-misses are not isolated events; they are daily warnings that demand attention,” says Teresa Di Felice, Assistant Vice President of Government & Community Relations at CAA South Central Ontario (CAA SCO). “The results of this study create an opportunity to proactively assess intersection design and implement measures that enhance safety for all road users.” Partnering with Miovision, the study used cameras and AI to monitor and analyze intersections across Canada in real time. Shockingly, one in every 770 pedestrians and one in every 500 cyclists experience a high-risk or critical near-miss. Near-Misses Are Predictors of Future Collisions The study found that near misses most often involved vehicles making a right turn. More than half (55 per cent of pedestrians and 50 per cent of cyclists) had a close call with a vehicle. More than a third (34 per cent of pedestrians and 36 per cent of cyclists) were involved in conflict with a left-turning vehicle. Most Canadian intersections accommodate thousands of pedestrians daily, meaning at least three serious incidents occur at a single location every day. “These aren’t just close calls; they are collisions waiting to happen,” says Di Felice. “By pinpointing near-miss hotspots, municipalities can now prioritize upgrades that prevent collisions before they happen.” Solutions That Make Intersections Safer The study highlights key design features proven to reduce near-misses, including: Dedicated left-turn lanes to prevent dangerous interactions. Leading pedestrian intervals, allowing pedestrians to start crossing before vehicles move. Advanced green lights for left-turning vehicles, reducing hesitation and confusion. Cities that implement these solutions can dramatically decrease the risk of collisions and make their streets safer for all road users. Traditional road safety measures rely on collision data, meaning changes only happen after injuries occur. Near-miss tracking is the next step in proactive safety planning, allowing experts to prevent crashes before they happen. CAA is urging municipal and provincial leaders to embrace technology-driven safety monitoring, citing the compelling benefits revealed by this study. Data was collected using 360-degree cameras at intersections of various designs across seven provinces, including Nova Scotia, Québec, Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia. Using AI-powered video analytics, Miovison was able to detect near misses and assess risk levels based on vehicle speed and trajectory. The study's detailed findings can be found here: CAA Intersection Safety Study Media Broll can be found here: https://vimeo.com/1094061982/90cf023ced
J.S. Held Announces the First Global Consulting Company Chief Intellectual Property Officer
Global consulting firm J.S. Held proudly announces the appointment of intellectual property (IP) expert James E. Malackowski as the first Chief Intellectual Property Officer (CIPO) of a global consulting company. J.S. Held Chief Executive Officer Lee Spirer observes, “In today's knowledge-based economy, the role of CIPO serves an important strategic and operational role both internally and in support of clients.” Protecting J.S. Held Intellectual Property and Other Intangible Assets J.S. Held experts have developed methodologies, frameworks, proprietary tools, and research that support client work. The CIPO partners across the business to ensure that these intangible assets are identified, protected, and leveraged to benefit the business. “Having dedicated IP leadership will help the company move faster in developing and deploying new methodologies, while ensuring reasonable measures of protecting our innovations,” noted James E. Malackowski. Managing J.S. Held Intellectual Property and Other Intangible Assets J.S. Held maintains a robust portfolio of patents including a “System and Method for Financing an Insurance Transaction”, trademarks, data, trade secrets, and other proprietary technologies that support client work. “As CIPO, I intend to partner with company leadership and our professional experts across the globe to manage and monetize the many patent, trademark, data, and other proprietary assets that set J.S. Held apart among our competitors, benefitting clients and our investors,” added James E. Malackowski. Industry’s Most Comprehensive Global Intellectual Property Consulting Group Ocean Tomo, a part of J.S. Held, is rooted in an expansive understanding of intellectual property (IP) value and risk, providing a foundation of Expertise for the Innovation Economy™. Built upon more than three decades of experience assessing IP in the most rigorous of venues - state, federal, and international courts, Ocean Tomo clients benefit from continuous feedback between litigation economic damage outcomes, transaction pricing, capital market valuations, debt financing terms, equity assessments, and deep technical insight. The team possesses the most comprehensive and market-tested understanding of IP value. Financial, market, and technical experts uniquely understand the contributory value of patented inventions, know-how, brands, and copyrights that permeate every business, viewing IP not simply as an isolated asset, but as an integral component of enterprise value. Multidimensional Intellectual Property-Informed Experts Benefit J.S. Held Clients Intellectual property expertise permeates the global organization. Beyond the expertise within J.S. Held’s dedicated IP practice Ocean Tomo, a part of J.S. Held, multidisciplinary experts across J.S. Held combine intellectual property expertise to core specializations, including: • Artificial Intelligence (AI) • Business Intelligence • Construction Advisory • Enterprise Risk Management • Fraud Investigations • Forensic Accounting • Insurance Claims Consulting • Restructuring, Turnaround, Receivership, and Bankruptcy Tangible and Intangible Asset Value Understanding The depth and breadth of J.S. Held’s work in the property and casualty insurance market and Ocean Tomo’s work across all forms of intellectual property and other intangible assets uniquely combine to create a strong foundation in risk assessment, data analysis, global awareness, regulatory compliance, technological adaptability, and risk mitigation. Collectively, these skills better equip J.S. Held experts to assess business risk across diverse geographies, geopolitical landscapes, regulatory frameworks, and technological advancements for the benefit of our clients. Learn more about the new J.S. Held Chief Intellectual Property Officer, James E. Malackowski: Looking to know more or connect with James E. Malackowski? Simply click on the expert's icon now to arrange an interview today. For any other media inquiries - contact : Kristi L. Stathis, J.S. Held +1 786 833 4864 Kristi.Stathis@JSHeld.com
A path to fair minerals trade: Researcher champions global trust model
As the world races to build cleaner energy systems and powerful AI technologies, the demand for critical minerals—like lithium, cobalt, and rare earths—is soaring. But with this demand comes rising global tension over who controls these resources. University of Delaware Professor Saleem Ali, an international expert in environmental policy and chair of UD's Department of Geography and Spatial Sciences, is suggesting a new way forward. In a new article published in Science, along with a United Nations policy brief, Ali and his coauthors propose the creation of a Global Minerals Trust. The article notes how the international plan would help countries work together to manage and share critical minerals fairly and sustainably—avoiding political fights, price shocks and environmental damage. “Without a shared framework, we risk deepening global inequalities, triggering unnecessary resource conflicts and undermining our ability to deliver on climate goals,” says Ali, who also leads the Critical Minerals and Inclusive Energy Transition program at the United Nations University Institute for Water, Environment and Health. The proposed Trust would use independent checks—similar to those used in nuclear safety—to make sure countries are meeting environmental and social standards. Each nation would keep control of its own resources but agree to prioritize sales of those minerals at market prices so that they can be used for clean energy infrastructure. The article builds on a TED Talk that Ali gave last year as part of the Rockefeller Foundation's "Big Bets" initiative. Ali is available for interviews on the topic and can be reached by clicking on his profile.
Can AI save our oyster reefs? A team of scientists put it to the test
With global oyster populations having declined by more than 85% from historical levels, restoring and monitoring these critical ecosystems is more urgent than ever. But traditional monitoring methods aren’t cutting it. A team of researchers that included the University of Delaware's Art Trembanis have taken a new approach, testing an AI model designed to recognize live oysters from underwater images. The findings? The AI model, called ODYSSEE, was faster than human experts and non-expert annotators, processing in just 40 seconds what took humans up to 4.5 hours. But it wasn’t yet as accurate. In fact, the tool misidentified more live oysters than both groups of human annotators. Still, the team found that ODYSEE has real potential to monitor reefs in real time. Why does this matter? As climate change, pollution and overharvesting continue to pressure coastal environments, more precise and non-invasive monitoring tools like ODYSSEE could become essential to restoration efforts and environmental policy. Trembanis can discuss this new tool and its ability to identify live oysters without disturbing the reef. His expertise in oceanography, engineering and robotics expertise was key to the team's work. The results, published in the journal Frontiers, offer both caution and hope in the race to improve ocean monitoring with emerging technologies. To set up an interview with Trembanis, visit his profile and click on the contact button.
